Diwakar S/O Rambhau Shirbhate ... vs Baldeo S/O Kashinath Mohod And ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 5101 Bom

923.SA.42.2022.                                                                                  1/2


            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                      NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

                              Second Appeal No.42/2022
                           Diwakar s/o Rambhau Shirbhate
                                        ..Versus..
                          Baldeo s/o Kashinath Mohod & Ors.
****************************************************************************************************
Office notes, Office Memoranda of
Coram, appearances, Court's orders                      Court's or Judge's Orders
or directions and Registrar's orders.
****************************************************************************************************
                 Ms. S.W. Deshpande, Advocate for the Appellant.

               CORAM : S.M. MODAK, J.

DATE : 7th JUNE, 2022.

1. Heard learned Advocate Ms. S.W. Deshpande for the appellant/original plaintiff No.2 on the point of admission.

2. The suit for declaration as to ownership was dismissed. It was confirmed by the first Appellate Court. On one hand, plaintiff claims that his father has purchased the suit house from the father of defendant No.1 on 8 th October, 1984 by way of registered sale-deed. Admittedly, its copy was not filed before the trial Court. At the same time, there is an agreement to sell that house on 28th May, 2007 in between the appellant and defendant No.2. That transaction could not be completed because plaintiff is not shown as the owner but Kashinath-father of defendant No.1 was shown as owner.

3. According to the appellant, there is admission given by the defendants about the ownership of the father of the plaintiff

923.SA.42.2022. 2/2

and that is not considered by both the Courts below.

4. The appellant to file copies of evidence.

5. Three weeks time is granted.

6. Issue notice to the respondents, returnable after three weeks.

Civil Application (CAS) No.200/2022

1. Both the Courts below have dismissed the suit. Hence, there is no question of staying its operation. There is apprehension that respondent Nos.1 and 2 are likely to take possession on the basis of favourable judgments in their favour. Admittedly, such possession cannot be taken without following the due process of law.

2. The respondents are restrained from taking possession of the suit house without following the due process of law until further orders.

3. Issue notice to the respondents, returnable after three weeks.

JUDGE

Vijay

Signed By:VIJAY KUMAR Personal Assistant Signing Date:08.06.2022 18:23